Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24780368›Full record

SynthesisThe Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases

Safety, tolerability and side effects of human papillomavirus vaccines: a systematic quantitative review.

Ana Katherine Gonçalves, Ricardo Ney Cobucci, Hugo Marcus Rodrigues, Amanda Gosson de Melo, Paulo César Giraldo

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

33 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ana Katherine GonçalvesPostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, RN, Brazil. Electronic address: anakatherine@ufrnet.br.
Ricardo Ney CobucciPostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, RN, Brazil.
Hugo Marcus RodriguesPostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, RN, Brazil.
Amanda Gosson de MeloPostgraduate Program in Health Sciences, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN), Natal, RN, Brazil.
Paulo César GiraldoObstetric and Gynecology Department, Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP),Campinas, SP, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte · BRUniversidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recently, many studies have evaluated HPV vaccine safety and adverse effects. Two vaccines have been recently evaluated in randomized controlled trials: the bivalent vaccine for HPV 16 and 18 (Cervarix, GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals, Rixensart, Belgium) and the quadrivalent vaccine for HPV 6, 11, 16, and 18 (Gardasil, Merck and Co., Inc., Whitehouse Station, NJ). We have performed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials in which HPV vaccines were compared with placebo regarding safety, tolerability and adverse effects. Studies were searched up to March 2013 in the databases: Pubmed, Embase, Scielo and Cancerlit. Odds Ratios (OR) of most incident adverse effects were obtained. Twelve reports, involving 29,540 subjects, were included. In the HPV 16/18 group, the most frequently reported events related to the vaccine were pain (OR 3.29; 95% CI: 3.00-3.60), swelling (OR 3.14; 95% CI: 2.79-3.53) and redness (OR 2.41; 95% CI: 2.17-2.68). For the HPV 6/11/16/18 group the events were pain (OR 2.88; 95% CI: 2.42-3.43) and swelling (OR 2.65; 95% CI: 2.0-3.44). Concerning the HPV 16/18 vaccine, pain was the most common outcome detected. These effects can be due to a possible VLP-related inflammation process. Fatigue was the most relevant general effect observed followed by fever, gastrointestinal symptoms, and headache. In the HPV 6/11/16/18 group, only general symptoms, pain and swelling were observed. Pain and swelling were the most frequent. Comparing HPV 16/18 to HPV 6/11/16/18 vaccines, the former presented more adverse effects, perhaps because there are many more trials evaluating the bivalent vaccine. Other studies are needed to clarify this issue.

Indexed as

FemaleHuman Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18HumansPapillomavirus InfectionsPapillomavirus VaccinesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicUterine Cervical NeoplasmsHuman Papillomavirus Recombinant Vaccine Quadrivalent, Types 6, 11, 16, 18human papillomavirus vaccine, L1 type 16, 18Papillomavirus VaccinesAdverse effectsHPVVaccines

Identifiers

PMID24780368
PMCPMC9425215
OpenAlexW1990025968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.